Same here ! I won't look back.

Srixon irons are every bit as good as every other brand for sure and they deserve more attention for what they do. Yeah ok being honest, is the custom fitting (stock no upcharge) selections as comprehensive as Mizuno, absolutely not and also are there the same amount of heads to choose from with specific uses as Mizuno, no also, but for the irons they do make, they just perform really really well and more golfers should spend the time to try them at least 👍

How's the utility iron?? Also, your 4-6 set you "bent" back, is that +1 when ordering tgem??

@@gcoffey223 I love the utility iron, better than my previous cobra radspeed hybrid., buttery smooth and incredible feel. I have had an issue with the ust coil shaft and they replaced the iron. Excellent customer service. My ZX5 4,5 and 6 iron are bent 1° weak each. My utility, and ZX7 irons are normal degree angles from Srixon. I have a ust coil stiff shaft on the utility and project x 6.5 rifle shafts. I absolutely love my set of Srixon irons, you can’t go wrong with them!

@jaredfofonoff7615 ha ha ha... I got that rad speed cobra hybrid too!! I think that 3 iron in a recoil f3 would be perfect. I tried all the shafts getting fitted(still haven't pulled the trigger due to holidays) but those zx5 snd 7's felt amazing and those shafts fit me the best. Thank you for the input, may you find the fairway!!

Yep this has been picked up previously, I'll copy and paste my response as that hopefully will adequately answer your questions 👍 Hi Tom, Thanks for the heads up on this. Looking back at it again the information I collate is done by multiple screenshots from FSX and then placed within the editing timeline, so to try and help as I've made this confusing........ My words are correct, its the slide titles that are wrong. I've used the slide titles the wrong way round 🙈 Well Done for spotting this, you are the only one to so far 🙂 So to reiterate, listen to what I say on the heel hits rather than the on screen stuff 👍 when i film I record directly after filming and am reading it straight from FSX2020 analytics and then do the editing stuff afterwards.... of which i messed up... Every one is human i guess 😀😂

Hi Derek, thanks for your individual opinion on how you found these two irons, golfers are unique in themselves and find different things so really glad you found the right set for you 👍🏻

The V sole is the reason I got the ZX7 MKII and it's the reason the ZX5 MKII irons have such good turf interaction.

Hi Andrew, that's ok I wasn't suggesting you were questioning it, it's just a bit more background for my testing habits and rituals so other viewers watching know how the data is measured 👍🏻 I'm doing a live stream on Monday (3rd June) at 7pm UK Time. If you have any other questions or queries, feel free to join in and I can answer them live for you 👍🏻 👍🏻

Really glad you enjoyed the video 👍🏻 👍🏻

Hi Andrew, thanks for the comment. I have my own preferences for the brand of clothes etc that I may choose to wear personally, but it doesn't stop me from being unbiased and fair from reviewing any particular piece of equipment. The biggest plus point for any findings is that it is done with the use of GCQuad which doesn't care which golf club in using it just gives club head and ball data for each. The biggest reason why I'm so analytical and why I give club head data is that numbers don't care about bias, so it's always a fair test 👍🏻👍🏻

Zx5 is not hollow. That’s the zx4.

the zx5 and zx4 are hollow. the zx7 are the one piece

Wrong. Srixon describes the ZX5's as: "These cavity back, players distance Irons combine premium forged feel with advanced distance technology. Featuring a narrow topline with moderate sole width, blade length and offset." @@timmy2pillows

@@MXJEFF94 not sure where it says that they are one piece in your quote. The face can be forged but that doesnt mean it is one piece

If I recall correctly the ZX4s and 5s are described as having a mainframe in the back of the club. So is that hollow or cavity back or what?

Sorry but Mizuno custom options are much better. They have a larger shaft and grip selection that doesn’t add any extra to the build. Mizuno also has their shaft optimizer you can try at most local fitters to help determine specs.

@@MrMatthew262 well it’s hard to tell considering it’s impossible to see those options or order without going through a custom fitter. I prefer to order through a website

Hopefully the Shaft Optimiser is used at ALL Mizuno Fitting Centres, as it really is such an amazing tool which cuts through the old 'Bumper Car' style fitting technique employed through the passage of time. Really cuts down the errors and the time within shaft fitting 👍🏻

I've done a few on my channel over the years. One reaching back many moons ago, and one fairly recently. They are on my channel for all to see. All with open and transparent information. It proves that I'm not defying the laws of physics. If a golfer pulls in a direction (angle 90 degrees to motion for full bending) or anything other than the direction of travel or 180 to it, the shaft bends. I, in transition pull the shaft along its axis rather than pulling the handle at an angle and therefore creating loading. I have seen a hand full of amateur golfers over the years that also demonstrate a similar characteristic. They are freely available on my channel for all to see 👍🏻

Yes it was a screenshot editing mistake, the labels are wrong so ignore what the label says on the screen for that particular one. Well done for noticing though, proves you were paying attention 😊😊👍🏻

I’d also be interested in how the t150 stacks up against the zx5 in forgiveness. I know the zx5 is bigger, but does all that tungsten make the t150 closer in forgiveness than its appearance would make you believe?

If it helps you I have t150s and looking to go to zx5. The 150s are razor thin and very hard to hit unless you are a low handicap

Haven't done that one yet Dan but I can get it on the list for you 👍🏻

Thanks@@AskGolfNut

Still trying to get through to Titleist about getting hold of them to test 😟😟

To be honest I haven't looked at the article to see how and what metrics were used for the test and how it was tested and how the parameters were measured and set. I guess depending on what metrics one is measuring any club could come off better or worse than another 👍🙂👍

I've just searched for the website article and I'm finding myself literally shaking my head as I'm scanning through it..... SOOOOO many holes in the information given its not even funny. For literally every single golf club listed on that test regardless of manufacturer I would take absolutely no notice of it whatsoever. There isn't a hint of how the test is actually conducted and measured and even on the first distance front, no mention is made that golf clubs with stronger lofts are winning the distance chart...... well that's what happens when a club with 30 degrees of loft goes up against the same numbered iron with 27 😂😀😂😂

thank you so much for your response.... !! by the way love your reviews so much info....well done helping us choose !!!

Hi Matt, nope just working my way through the list of requests that you guys ask of me 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻

Hi Tom, Thanks for the heads up on this. Looking back at it again the information I collate is done by multiple screenshots from FSX and then placed within the editing timeline, so to try and help as I've made this confusing........ My words are correct, its the slide titles that are wrong. I've used the slide titles the wrong way round 🙈 Well Done for spotting this, you are the only one to so far 🙂 So to reiterate, listen to what I say on the heel hits rather than the on screen stuff 👍 when i film I record directly after filming and am reading it straight from FSX2020 analytics and then do the editing stuff afterwards.... of which i messed up... Every one is human i guess 😀😂

Great, thanks!

Pro 223, i230, Cobra Tour to name a few that could work quite well 👍🏻

Very happy to be educated in a better way to show the data (although Foresight only show SD and Mean). If you could explain in a dead simple way so I can get where you are coming from and the potential differences between what is currently shown to that of the new way 👍🏻👍🏻 If it's easier / better and would be easily introduced into my content with the restrictions of the software I use then I'm all for it 👍🏻👍🏻

@@AskGolfNut if you want to know whether two sample means are statistically different from each other, you need to calculate the following: (mean_1 - mean_2)/(square root(Std_1^2/n_1 + Std_2^2/n_2)) - btw - a^2 = a*a, so, std_1^2=std_1*std_1 and same for std_2. If the value you get is between -2 and 2, you can be confident that the two means are not statistically different, if this ratio is either smaller than -2 or bigger than 2, then you can conclude that the two means are statistically different). From Foresight you get all the parameters/values you need to calculate this ratio - mean_1 and mean_2 would be the average spin rates in the mizuno and srixon, respectively, the std_1 and std_2, are the standard deviations of the spin rates for mizuno and srixon. Finally, n_1 and n_2 are the number of shots you hit to get the mean and standard deviations for mizuno and srixon, respectively. Foresight gives you all these values, it's just a matter of doing some (basic) algebra. In this example, assuming you hit 50 shots with each club, (5044-4831)/sqrt(331^2/50+364^2/50)=213/69.58=3.06>2 - > The Mizuno spin rate is statistically higher than that of the Srixon. BTW - kudos to you for asking how to do this, because Mark Crossfield makes a similar mistake to the one you made (mixing the standard deviation of the distribution with that of the mean), and despite me pointing it out multiple times he never asked how to do it better. The more shots you hit, the easier it is to distinguish two clubs along the dimensions of interest by having into account sample variability (human testing is the main source, but this also happens with robot testing - with robot testing you just need fewer shots to be able to separate two means).

@danieldias4073 mark is a very interesting individual, giving credit where its due, he is the reason I started my KZfaq channel all those years ago to try and be better and more transparent than the rest (Mark although could be more interactive, I believe he is also of a similar mindset). Could the above be put into a very simple excel spreadsheet so that the information could be exported and calculated automatically for me given the number of copied and pasted entries from a comma separated value export from FSX? Using =CountA to collect the number of shots for the formula above? That's me saying, if you have the time and inclination, could it be something that you clearly have far more competence than I to produce effectively also in an efficient way? 👍🏻 👍🏻

@@AskGolfNut yes, you can use an excel formula to calculate/test the difference between two averages. The formula is "T.TEST" and the inputs are the arrays with the values for the two clubs (say, the individual spin rate for each shot hit with the mizuno and the spin rate of each shot hit with the srixon) and then you need to choose the number of tails of the test (2 - this allows to say whether the means are different; if you choose 1 - you will be able to say if one is smaller than the other) and the type of test (3, so that variances are not assumed equal) - this is the formula =T.TEST(array containing club 1 values, array containing club 2 values, 2, 3). The output of this function is going to be a number between 0 and 1 (in this case a probability), and if this number is smaller than 0.05 you conclude that the means are statistically different, where as if the number if larger than 0.05, you conclude that there is not statistical evidence that the two means are different. Note that the number of shots with each club does not need to be the same. I personally think that using this type of methodology really allows to say if one club (say driver) is longer than the other, spinier, more efficient, etc. For club fitting this may not be very useful because 1) player being fitted will likely not be very precise on average and 2) you would need many shots, but when you are trying to say something about the attributes of a club or golf ball (mygolfspy's ball distance analysis is useful and interesting, but they don't realize how much of those differences may simply be due to sampling error, therefore irrelevant - when they wrote about yellow vs white balls, that was really silly) relative to other club this is how it should be done.

@danieldias4073 thanks for the info, I'd lying if I said I understand all that you have written, I do feel that I would need to further understand the whole meaning and context of what you've said to be able to confidently either perform the analysis and also talk about it in a way that I can put it across in somewhat of an understandable fashion 👍🏻

To show people what the differences are, the strengths and weaknesses, the forgiveness and performance..... All that individual golfers need to attribute to their own game. How does me saying which one I prefer, which has no basis whatsoever to the person viewing, make one better than the other 🤷 The whole idea of a review should be to try and keep subjective preference out of the equation as that changes with the human on the end of the club. The objective differences always win through as its the physical differences between the two products in question. Thanks for the comment and for watching 👍🏻